stahrgazer wrote:Hey, Andy, how about a compromise.. start an official strategy discussion thread for each map guide? That way, the list and guide threads can remain pristine as you want, but every guide will have ONE place for any questions, comments, etc.

As an author of at least one of the guides, I'd like to know where to see if reviewers and I missed something so I can bug you guys to let me make a rev (at least, if someone has a concern fairly soon after guides are released).

If you assign a mod to open a thread to discuss each guide, it's much more official than "just any player" starting up a discussion.

One place for all guides = junk of irrelevant messages with inability to follow someone posts. It will be impossible to handle a discussion there.

stahrgazer wrote:Hey, Andy, how about a compromise.. start an official strategy discussion thread for each map guide? That way, the list and guide threads can remain pristine as you want, but every guide will have ONE place for any questions, comments, etc.

As an author of at least one of the guides, I'd like to know where to see if reviewers and I missed something so I can bug you guys to let me make a rev (at least, if someone has a concern fairly soon after guides are released).

If you assign a mod to open a thread to discuss each guide, it's much more official than "just any player" starting up a discussion.

One place for all guides = junk of irrelevant messages with inability to follow someone posts. It will be impossible to handle a discussion there.

I suggested one place EACH for discussion of each guide; not one thread to discuss all guides. Just separate from the guides themselves.

I agree with admin that if they open the "official guides" posts to discussion, they'll fill up with junk and irrelevant messages. I also agree with you guys that we need an official place for legitimate strategy discussion.

Thus, my suggestion of having an official strat discussion thread for each guide (first post should link to the guide) is a reasonable compromise:

Ok, I agree with that. Thou I don't see the difference in amount of junk and irrelevant messages in official guide thread or official guide discussion thread. And I bet people will want the 1st post of the discussion thread to duplicate the guide itself (for quoting purposes).

And the point of locking guides... you lock something when it is unchangeable or is a finished document, like rules or ISO standards. Guides (in a perfect world) should be updated along users comments. Also, author can expand some moments and answer some questions like why did the author wrote this and not that. I wouldn't call it a junk.

Or at least - give it a try. Open guides for a few weeks and see how people react. Clean and structured discussion - you were wrong. Flaming and baiting - we were wrong (but you could wipe such messages to keep only clean and structured discussion, but I guess you don't want to).

I agree that guides mostly likely are evolving. We simply wanted to make it so when new users/new-to-a-map users come to a Guide, they don't feel like they have to wade through every single post in a guide topic, as it expand and expands. The guides are really meant to be a starting point, or a jumping off point. No one guide can capture everything about a map, but it hopefully can give someone new/new-to-a-map users some starting insight.

How about we open up the Guides completed by the current project (the older guides are in the process of being REVAMPed so we'll wait for their official re-launch, I think), and after the first post, we place a second post as a 'divider.'

This would have a line or some other formatting method, with a small message that the Official Guide ends here, but there may be relevant strategy discussion outside the scope of the basic map guide located in the first post.

Master Fenrir wrote:

porkenbeans wrote:Last time that I looked, I was the leader in points and win %, on Prohibition Chicago. I would be honored to write a tutorial on it, if asked.

Maprank says you're 3rd, but you're stats are fantastic. I think it'd be great if you were willing to write it and would like for you to do it. If you're willing, shoot me a PM and I'll add you to the group.

We'd love to have more people contributing, especially if they are/think they are terrific at a certain map or maps. You need no request, just ask to join the project and get to work!

AndyDufresne wrote:How about we open up the Guides completed by the current project (the older guides are in the process of being REVAMPed so we'll wait for their official re-launch, I think), and after the first post, we place a second post as a 'divider.'This would have a line or some other formatting method, with a small message that the Official Guide ends here, but there may be relevant strategy discussion outside the scope of the basic map guide located in the first post.--Andy

Concur on all of this; the project is revamping all the guides, even if only to add minor notes on the game options that were not part of CC when those original guides were created; and guide authors seem quite willing to admit, we do not and cannot capture every strategic point for any map.

If the first few seem to turn into a bruhaha, flamefest, or other nonsense, you can always decide to lock any remaining guide threads right away. At least then, you'll have tried to open them up to legitimate alternative strategy discussion.

You know what might be a good way to proceed, Why not make a standard template, or form, that all of the individual guides loosely follow. This would bring a certain continuity, among all of the guides. It would also make it much easier, for a person to look up any particular item that they might be interested in.

So if this approach was implemented, the discussion now would be all about, what items should be included. Then, how should the form be structured.

BTW, can someone tell me who has knocked me down to 3rd. on Pro. Chicago ? and is my 80% win ratio, still top ?

Last edited by porkenbeans on Tue Aug 10, 2010 12:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

porkenbeans wrote:You know what might be a good way to proceed, Why not make a standard template, or form, that all of the individual guides loosely follow. This would bring a certain continuity, among all of the guides. It would also make it much easier, for a person to look up any particular item that they might be interested in.

So if this approach was implemented, the discussion now would be all about, what items should be included. Then, how should the form be structured.

We already have a standard template. Join the group if you are interested, really, seriously, do it.

n00blet wrote:And you knew that all pms from your account to me have been blocked for quite some time now. In any event, seems nothing needs to be done.

Nope, had no idea you were still carrying a grudge for me calling your behavior what it was in a game ages ago.

Why change my settings when I know as soon as I let your messages come through it'll just open the floodgates for more of this? I've been happy ignoring you inasmuch as my travels have taken me thus far.

The project leaders listed a series of guides for us to start with, that wasn't even half the available maps on CC, and we're not done with those yet. Plus, there are still all the guides that we need to get to after we complete the initial list.

Ffraid wrote:Um, what if we have corrections? I mean, not of strategic opinions, but corrections of "factual" statements about a map presented in a guide. Where should we go with those?

You can pass along factual corrections to our Strategy Guide Leaders, listed in one of my previous posts.--Andy

And, the guide author would probably be interested to know. The author of each guide is listed in the respective guides. While only the leaders of the project can correct "locked" guides, they've been diligent at helping author volunteers.

Ffraid wrote:Um, what if we have corrections? I mean, not of strategic opinions, but corrections of "factual" statements about a map presented in a guide. Where should we go with those?

You can pass along factual corrections to our Strategy Guide Leaders, listed in one of my previous posts.--Andy

And, the guide author would probably be interested to know. The author of each guide is listed in the respective guides. While only the leaders of the project can correct "locked" guides, they've been diligent at helping author volunteers.

AndyDufresne wrote:I agree that guides mostly likely are evolving. We simply wanted to make it so when new users/new-to-a-map users come to a Guide, they don't feel like they have to wade through every single post in a guide topic, as it expand and expands. The guides are really meant to be a starting point, or a jumping off point. No one guide can capture everything about a map, but it hopefully can give someone new/new-to-a-map users some starting insight.

How about we open up the Guides completed by the current project (the older guides are in the process of being REVAMPed so we'll wait for their official re-launch, I think), and after the first post, we place a second post as a 'divider.'

This would have a line or some other formatting method, with a small message that the Official Guide ends here, but there may be relevant strategy discussion outside the scope of the basic map guide located in the first post.

Remember, if you'd like to join this project, help contribute your strategy or write a guide of your own, please contact one of our Strategy Guide Leaders: Master Fenrir, Lindax, Laughingcavalier, nagerous, ljex. Maybe you can earn yourself a General Contribution Medal!

Thanks to all those who have contributed their hard work so far, both in taking the initiative to write and format a Strategy Guide, but also all those helping critique, suggest, and comment on such Guides as well---and may it continue!

Remember, if you'd like to join this project, help contribute your strategy or write a guide of your own, please contact one of our Strategy Guide Leaders: Master Fenrir, Laughingcavalier, nagerous, ljex. Maybe you can earn yourself a General Contribution Medal!

We've had some terrific participants so far throughout the early stages of this project---and a couple of new faces as well! I look forward to the continuation of it all.

Remember, if you'd like to join this project, help contribute your strategy or write a guide of your own, please contact one of our Strategy Guide Leaders: Master Fenrir, rdsrds2120, and nagerous. Maybe you can earn yourself a General Contribution Medal!

Thanks to all those who have contributed their energy and enthusiasm so far, both in taking the initiative to write and format a Strategy Guide, but also all those helping critique, suggest, and comment on such Guides as well. This is turning out to be quite a project, and I'm excited to see that it has some legs---I hope it can continue!